Skip to main content
Glama

snapchat_user_profile

Snapchat profile — stable identity card, millisecond timestamps, mediaType image/video (1 credit). Costs 1 credit. Empty results and failures are never charged. Pass cache=true for a free 24h cache hit (default always fresh).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesSnapchat username or profile URL. The URL platform must match this endpoint's platform. Do not pass cross-platform URLs, e.g. YouTube to TikTok, Instagram to Facebook, LinkedIn to X/Twitter, or Pinterest to Rumble.
cacheNoSet true to serve from the 24h response cache (0 credits on hit). Default false — always fetch fresh.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the burden, and it delivers meaningful details: cost of 1 credit, no charges on empty results/failures, and cache behavior. It discloses failure cost, freshness behavior, and output nature, though it does not address auth or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded with output characteristics, then cost, then caching. The only minor issue is slight redundancy: '(1 credit)' and 'Costs 1 credit' state the same information twice.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given only two parameters, one required, and no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation context: what kind of data is returned, cost implications, and cache behavior. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and call the tool correctly, though a bit more detail on the response shape would help.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add material semantics beyond the schema: cache=true and default fresh behavior are already documented in the schema, and the URL parameter is fully explained there. It does not clarify parameter semantics further.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the resource as a Snapchat profile and specifies what it returns: a stable identity card, millisecond timestamps, and media type image/video. While it lacks an explicit verb like 'fetch' or 'get', the meaning is unambiguous and the platform distinction separates it from sibling profile tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for Snapchat profiles through the tool name and first phrase, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention exclusions. It offers practical advice about cache=true and cost, but no direct comparison to other profile tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The platform-prefix convention keeps most of the 178 tools clearly separated, but several clusters are genuinely ambiguous: tiktok_live_info is explicitly described as 'Identical to TikTok Live', instagram_basic_profile and instagram_channel_details both return profile stats, and facebook_profile_posts overlaps with facebook_profile_reels. The generic 'Summarizer' descriptions for facebook_summarize, instagram_summarize, and tiktok_summarize provide no disambiguating detail at all.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant snake_case platform_resource_suffix pattern is followed remarkably consistently across 178 tools (e.g. youtube_channel_videos, tiktok_search_users, reddit_subreddit_posts). Minor deviations exist: the same creator resource is called 'channel' in some tools (tiktok_channel_details, instagram_channel_posts) but 'profile' or 'user' in others (facebook_profile_posts, twitch_user_videos, linnkme_profile); link-in-bio tools mostly use _page but linkme uses _profile; and the video_summarize/video_transcript pair lacks a platform prefix.

Tool Count2/5

At 178 tools this is far beyond what any agent can efficiently navigate in a single flat namespace, and even individual platform subsets exceed reasonable bounds (TikTok alone has ~34 tools, YouTube ~25). The sheer breadth of the multi-platform scope partially justifies the count, but the server would be far more usable split into per-platform servers.

Completeness4/5

The read-only data surface is impressively thorough: nearly every platform has profile + content + search + comments coverage, and TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook are covered end-to-end including shops, ads, transcripts, and summaries. Notable gaps are minor: Twitter has no keyword search tool, LinkedIn lacks comments, and Reddit has no user-profile endpoint, but none of these create dead ends for the server's core data-retrieval purpose.